THE Supreme Court (SC) has affirmed the ruling issued by the Court of Appeals (CA) which held that marital infidelity is considered as a form of psychological violence punishable by imprisonment under the Republic Act 9262, or the Anti-Violence Against Women and Their Children Act of 2004.
In an 18-page decision penned by Chief Justice Diosdado Peralta, the SC’s First Division sided with rulings issued by the CA and the Regional Trial Court of Las Piñas City which found petitioner Jaime Araza guilty of violating RA 9262.
The Court also affirmed the imposition of a minimum of six months to a maximum of eight-year prison term against Araza.
“The prosecution has established beyond reasonable doubt that Araza committed the crime of psychological violence, through his acts of marital infidelity, which caused mental or emotional suffering on the part of AAA [the wife],” the decision read.
Likewise, the Court directed Araza to pay a fine of P100,000 and moral damages in the amount of P25,000.
Araza was also directed by the SC to undergo a mandatory psychological counseling, or psychiatric treatment, and to report his compliance with the order to the trial court within 15 days after the completion of the counseling, or treatment.
The SC explained that psychological violence is an indispensable element of violation of Section 5(i) of RA 9262.
Equally important is the element of emotional anguish and mental suffering, which are personal to the complainant, according to the SC.
“The law does not require proof that the victim became psychologically ill due to the psychological violence done by her abuser. Rather, the law only requires emotional anguish and mental suffering to be proven,” the SC noted.
The Court explained that in order to establish emotional anguish, or mental suffering, jurisprudence only requires the testimony of the victim to be presented in court, as such experiences are personal to this party.
“The prosecution has established Araza’s guilt beyond reasonable doubt by proving that he committed psychological violence upon his wife by committing marital infidelity. AAA’s testimony was strong and credible. She was able to confirm that Araza was living with another woman,” the SC said.
Based on the records of the case, Araza’s wife testified that they were married on October 5, 1989, and were initially living together for 18 years without any marital issues.
However, in 2007, the wife learned that her husband was having an extramarital affair but initially did not believe it.
This prompted her to go to Zamboanga, where her husband was doing their networking business, to check for herself whether the information was true.
There, she was able to confirm that her husband was living with another woman.
After filing a complaint, the couple decided to settle their differences amicably on the condition that Araza and his mistress would never see each other again.
However, after two months, Araza left their conjugal home to go back to his mistress.
The wife testified that she had been receiving text messages from her husband’s mistress to the effect that he was sick and needed money for medicines.
A text message from the mistress threatening to kill her husband prompted her to file a writ of habeas corpus in 2013.
The lawyer sent a letter to the mistress to her known address, but when there was no reply.
This led her to go Zamboanga again to look for her husband where she discovered that Araza was living with his mistress anew and has three children with the latter.
The complainant said the whole ordeal has affected his psychological and physical well-being.
She said she got sick and was hospitalized while looking for her husband.
She testified that she had been suffering from insomnia and asthma and had been taking anti-depressant and sleeping pills to cope with her severe emotional and psychological turmoil.
She also testified that she had spent a huge sum of money in locating her husband and for her medical needs.